Archdiocese of Washington's El Pregonero Shilling For Hillary

The Archdiocese of Washington has two periodicals: Catholic Standard and El Pregonero.  The latter's ostensible purpose is to serve the needs of Hispanic Catholics within the archdiocese.  It seems these Catholics are being ill-served.

It was pointed out to me that an article in today's edition is shilling for Clinton based on her policies for fomenting illegal immigration.  Completely lacking in this article is any mention of her promotion of baby-murder.  Bear in mind this is an official publication of the Archdiocese of Washington.  If you (like me) don't read Spanish, there is a site that will translate for you; it's www.worldlingo.com.  There are probably others as well.

I've been told that there may be other articles within the publication that also serve to drum up support for Hillary.  In a publication that ostensibly serves the Catholic Church, this is completely unacceptable.  Hitherto they have gotten away from it for they have escaped the scrutiny of us bloggers who are English-speaking.  No longer.  Like their English-speaking counterparts at the Catholic Standard, they will be held to scrutiny by Catholic bloggers.  Hey - if the DC chancery refuses to do its job, I suppose it's up to us laity to take up their slack and combat the errors and heresies that flow from supposedly Catholic publications.

Cardinal Burke Weighs In On Responsible Catholic Voting

Yesterday LifeSiteNews relayed the proceeds of a teleconference with Cardinal Burke, in which they participated.  His Eminence gave some very cogent suggestion to Catholics and people of good will regarding the upcoming presidential elections.  I'll highlight and elaborate on a few salient points from the LSN article.

• "The faithful must vote for the candidate who will do the most to advance the protection of human life, defense of the family, respect for freedom, and care for the poor."  Note the imperative "must".  Now cannot that be said for some third-party candidate?  No - simply because he/she will not get elected.  There are only two viable candidates: Clinton and Trump.  Whether or not we like that situation is irrelevant.  It is what it is.  We need to deal with reality as it presents itself, not as we might wish it to be.
• "Burke warned Catholics against not voting at all and against the practice of writing in the name of a preferred candidate on the ballot, saying it could inadvertently cause the election of a candidate who does not respect life, family, and freedom."
• "Those are difficult considerations, and I don’t say any of this in a kind of easy way. But I do think that Catholics especially need to be very cautious and not simply opting out, or good pro-life people and good pro-family people, simply just throwing up their hands."

In that last point, His Eminence addresses the spiritual and intellectual malaise that has deluded many, if not most, of the #nevertrump crowd.  It is that malaise that seems to have caused Alan Keyes to blather on like Cokie Roberts - and he's only one of several.

Regular readers of this blog will recall that I've put forth the case that not only is it moral to vote for Trump during this election, but not to do so would be immoral.  It seems that Cardinal Burke's words corroborate my understanding of the moral theology as it pertains to this particular presidential race.

Our Parish Times And Strange Social Justice Opinions

I've written before about my opinion of Our Parish Times, the periodical published by the Catholic Business Network.  When it first appeared, it was a welcome alternative to the Catholic Standard.  Whereas the Standard's tilt was definitely to the left (after Tom Rowan retired), OPT took on issues and viewpoints that the Standard was reluctant to touch.  However, something happened to OPT.  In my perspective as a reader, it seems that the Archdiocese of Washington somehow neutered OPT.  Is that why their excellent columnist Bob McCarthy has disappeared from the OPT pages?

But they still retain Chuck Short, a former ADW official who is now working for Montgomery County Executive Ike Leggitt.  Two weeks ago I wrote how he has given donations to Chris Van Hollen as the latter runs for the US Senate seat being vacation by "katholyc" pro-abortion Barbara Mikulski.  In so doing, Short is subverting the campaign of the GOP pro-life candidate Kathy Szeliga; he's choosing abortion over life in this election.  Yet OPT sees fit to retain Short as he blathers about his left-wing perverted view of "social justice".  Do they keep him simply because of his connection with Leggitt?

His latest blather is entitled "Street Mercy".  Among other things he discusses the explosion in the numbers of those who panhandle at street corners and meridian strips.  Many, like myself, are concerned that the money they collect will be used to procure drugs and/or alcohol.  Short poo-poos such concerns, whipping out the "who am I to judge" canard, misquoting Jesus Christ in the process.  To be fair, Short is merely following the example of Pope Francis.  Make no mistake about it; while tippy-toeing around the matter, Short is suggesting that we engage in sentimentality as opposed to rationality, not consider to what we may be materially contributing, and blindly fork it over.

In that portion of his paragraph, Short demonstrates his lack of credibility in opining about Catholic social teaching.  Was St Katherine Drexel "judging" when she counseled against giving cash directly to beggers?  For many panhandlers, what they do is a racket (I've seen evidence of that at Shady Grove and Frederick).

I'll relate another incident that occurred at my parish several years ago, with the pastor immediately prior to our current one.  A "family of indigents" appeared in front of the churh doors, begging for money.  It was still going on when the pastor, from the pulpit, gave us the full story.  After they first appeared, the St. Vincent De Paul Society and other parish ministries approached them to see how they could assist.  The "family" declined their assistance, preferring instead to receive only cash.  The pastor suggested that we not give money to them.  Was Father being judgmental?  Our Lord did caution us to be discerning, something that Short fails (or refuses) to consider.  To his credit, Short does suggest a number of parish outreaches where we can volunteer.

What is the mission of the OPTanyway?  Is it simply to be a forum in which members of the CBN can advertise?  I don't see a mission statement in their publication.  If I missed it, please advise where it is located.  At any rate, their readership is being ill-served by columnists such as Chuck Short.

A Plumber To Be Boycotted

Why?  Because he is cooperating formally and materially with the mortal sin of murder.  By installing the plumbing for the Two Rivers Planned Parenthood Abortion Mill in northeast DC, he is no different than those who constructed the Nazi death camps of 85 years ago.  Moreover, he's quite cavalier and callous about the matter.  He admits he's doing it only for the money and that he would do so for the Ku Klux Klan.  Well, I suppose he's at least honest and consistent regarding his moral depravity.  But would you want him in your  home doing your plumbing?

Here's the DC permit with his contact information so that you can make an informed decision.  Below that is the video in which he struts his immorality.

When Jesuits Confer, Heresy Can Result

During World Youth Day last month in Krakow, the pope conferred with 28 Polish Jesuit priests.  He had some things to say about properly forming priests - or deforming them.  Among other things, he said:

• "Some priestly formation programs run the risk of educating in the light of overly clear and distinct ideas, and therefore to act within limits and criteria that are rigidly defined a priori, and that set aside concrete situations,"  Overly clear??  I must admit this is the first time I ever heard that phrase!  Now the phrase, "overly ambiguous" makes perfect sense - but "overly clear"?  Are we hearing some kind of Freudian slip here?  What does he think of the Ten Commandments?  "Thou shalt not commit adultery" seems to be quite clear to me and most certainly does define set limits and criteria.  Do these Jesuits think the Ten Commandments should be rendered the Ten Guidelines?  As far as these "concrete situations" that don't fall within the "limits and criteria"?  There's a word for them, as old as revelation itself - sin.
• "Many people leave the confessional disappointed. Not because the priest is bad, but because the priest doesn't have the ability to discern situations, to accompany them in authentic discernment."  Let me take a stab at translating this glop.  "Ability to discern situations" means the knack for engaging in "situation ethics" and/or Amoralis Lamentia mental gymnastics to justify heinous sins while deluding the poor soul into thinking that he/she is acting virtuously while in reality they are damning their immortal souls.  However, in the case of a priest who actually understands that he is "alter Christus" and who actually cares for immortal souls enough to rebuke the sinner, well, the sinner who is unrepentant can be "disappointed" that his/her sin isn't being condoned.
• And we continue.. "In life not all is black on white or white on black. The shades of grey prevail in life."  How many "shades of grey" are there?  Dare I guess "fifty"?  And why, oh why, do they prevail?  How about God's clear, unambiguous commands "prevailing", at least within His Church?

In another account of the meeting, we see other quotes from the pope.  For instance, he said, "Young people speak directly.  They want the truth or at least a straight response."   But as we saw in the preceding quotes, he wants priests to be trained to offer them anything but direct truth - or maybe offer them progressive flim-flam while calling it truth.  Talk about wolves dressed as shepherds.

All this is merely one of the logical outcomes of Amoralis Lamentia.  In addition to prayer, expect more of this and be prepared to refute it.

George Soros: Puppet Master For Hillary And The Vatican?

When I wrote my post this past Sunday (two days ago) about the anti-life motives of the climate-change crowd, I asked the question "how much Soros money is in this Catholic climate movement thing".  Some news today gives the answer to that question: billions of dollars.

Elizabeth Yore, an attorney affiliated with the Heartland Institute, wrote an article that was occasioned by some proceeds of the wikileaks data dump.  In the information was also details of plans to leverage Pope Francis' influence to sway the presidential election to Hillary Clinton.  Through his Open Society Institute, Soros planned to grant $650 billion to PICO and Faith in Public Life to engage the bishops regarding "income inequality": that is, apologetics for socialism.  Yore's article appears in the Remnant and on LifeSiteNews we see more details.

Yore mentioned that in 2015 both Vatican officials (Cardinal Maradiaga key among them) and Soros personnel collaborated on an Apostolic Exhortation on Climate Change and backing for the Paris Climate Treaty.  I wrote a bit about that at the time, noting the progressives that were wined and dined at the Vatican; see this anthology of posts.  In that first post I wrote, "I would like to think that the Vatican is just being naive and easily led when it comes to climate change.  However, I now believe there are powerful forces within the Vatican - the same ones controlling the USCCB - that are pulling puppet strings and doing their utmost to promote progressive agendas upon the whole world."  Now we know, and it makes perfect sense.  In USANews, we find remarks that Soros made about himself, remarks that seem to be quite candid to say the least.  He apparently holds himself to be some sort of "god" who controls Hillary and most likely the Vatican.  Obviously he's got the "god" part wrong, but he does wield massive influence over the leftwing in this country and in the Vatican.

The realization of Soros' influence at the Vatican seems to put many things in a new light:

• The bizarre resignation of Pope Benedict XVI
• The personnel shake-ups at the Vatican: Burke out, the formation of this "gang of nine", with Soros ally Maradiaga at the helm
• The none-too-disguised manipulation of the two family sin-nods

Of course they may all just be coincidences.  But there's so many of them - like so many dots out there just begging to be connected.

We must pray for our Church, and we must understand just what is happening to her in order to do so.

Pray For Your Own Salvation And For Our Nation

Yesterday's Gospel was from Luke 13:22-30, regarding the fewness of those who will be saved.  Our Lord said "strive to enter through the narrow gate for many will attempt to enter but will not be strong enough.."  Indeed, our homily discussed the dangers of presuming on God's mercy while thumbing our noses at his commands.  I'll post below this a video regarding mortal sin, hell and the 6th and 9th commandments.  Why those?  Because Our Lady of Fatima warned that sins of the flesh, that is, sins against God's commandments regarding our faculties for procreation of human life will be the leading cause of eternal damnation for souls.

Before I do so, I'd like to link to the current parish bulletin (see page 2), where Father highlights some worthy prayer efforts.  I might also add to that the 54-day Rosary novena, sponsored by Cardinal Burke.  We all know our poor nation and world need God's grace, and prayer is essential for obtaining that grace.  Such prayer will also be crucial as we ourselves seek to enter the narrow gate.

Climate-Change Hoax Perpetrators Revealing Their Anti-Life Motives

I was informed yesterday that my Catholic Media Coalition colleague, Stephanie Block wrote an article about a UK-based outfit called Catholic Climate Movement.  It caught my eye because a few days prior, on the aggregater site canon212.com, I saw articles in which the authors question the "morality" of having babies as the world deals with "global warming".  In this latter article, we see the anti-life underpinnings of the "climate warming" hysteria becoming more manifest; the protagonists aren't concealing it anymore - or at least not as much.

As Ms. Block says, this "Catholic climate movement" things makes reference to Laudato Si, a papal writing that is fraught with difficulties, not the least of which is the false legitimacy it lends to leading proponents of population control, such as Jeffrey Sachs and others.  I've written about these in the past.  To refresh your memories, I suggest you read these posts and the linked material, paying special attention to this expose that Michael Voris did several years ago regarding the "global warming" hoax.

In the past several years that I've been looking at these outfits, I've learned that much can be gleaned from these outfits by looking at their members, directors, and other resources, usually readily available on their sites.  This "Catholic climate movement" is no different.  Looking at their member organizations, we see quite a few of the "usual suspects":

• Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good
• Pax Christi
• Leadership Conference of Women Religious
• Franciscan Action Network - By the way, this November they are presenting a "Cardinal McCarrick award" to Karenna Gore, director of "Center for Earth Ethics".  They conveniently forget to mention that she is a daughter of Al Gore and most likely pro-abortion in her own right.
• Catholic Charities - Recall that its national CEO, Msgr John Enzler, donated to the the campaigns of two pro-abortion politicians.

That first organization, being a recipient of money from George Soros, makes me wonder how much Soros money is in this "Catholic climate movement" thing.  We know that Soros' money had a role in the murder of Terri Schiavo.

Take a look at these facts and understand how the "movers and shakers" of the climate-change hoax are playing the "social-justice" crowd for dupes.  Please warn your family, friends, etc not to swallow that kool-aid.  Ms. Block finishes her excellent article by stating that "you don't need to be Catholic to sign a climate petition".  I might have amended that to read "no real Catholic should sign this climate petition".

Subtle Heresies In Hymns At Mass

That is what I encountered last weekend at the 11:15 Mass at St John Neumann in Gaithersburg.  It was one phrase in the Offertory hymn that was so problematic as to be heretical.  I find that often happens in songs with a "social justice" theme.

The hymn was When Jesus Came Preaching by Fred Pratt Green, a now-deceased Methodist minister in England.  Here's the embedded heresy: "so let none of us swerve from our mission to serve that has made us his church from the start".  That phrase displays a totally inverted and perverted view of the Church.  I'll contrast this with some facts from the Baltimore Catechism, facts that I learned in the first grade.  I'll list questions 136-138.

• 136 What is the Church?  The Church is the congregation of all baptized persons united in the same true faith, the same sacrifice, and the same sacraments, under the authority of the Sovereign Pontiff and the bishops in communion with him.
• 137 Who founded the Church? Jesus Christ founded the Church.
• 138 Why did Jesus Christ found the Church?  Jesus Christ founded the Church to bring all men to eternal salvation.

According to Green, this "mission to serve" caused the church to come into being.  For him, the question isn't even who spawned the Church but what.  In his thinking, Jesus Christ Himself has been substituted by this "mission to serve" as originator of the Church.  This is de facto idolatry.  I'm sure that was not the intention of any of St John's music minstry to promulgate heresy and idolatry, but nonetheless that is in fact what happened, with many decent Catholics in the pews singing this right along, not realizing until too late what was happening (assuming they were alert enough to sense a problem).

Additionally, this "mission to serve" is never quite defined.  Since we did have a guest priest who spoke on behalf of a charity to serve the third-world impovershed (and it sounds like a very good organization), I venture a guess that this song was picked with "social justice" in mind.   Question 138 states quite plainly God's intention for the Church: to facilitate eternal salvation, that is, to save people from hell and get them into heaven.  Any charitable endeavor, important though it is, is ancillary to the salvation of immortal souls.

Too many are losing sight of the primacy of eternal salvation.  Indeed, far too many don't believe in hell and don't seem to care that one unconfessed mortal sin at the time of death will result in eternal damnation.  Jesus spoke about hell many times during His earthly ministry, yet today we rarely (if ever) hear the word "hell" mentioned from the pulpit.  This constitutes a gross disservice to the wayward Catholic in the pew, who will never benefit from the warning to avail him/herself of Confession.  Now that is a true "social injustice", one that will have everlasting consequences.

At any rate, I'd suggest that when we arrive at Mass and are waiting for it to begin, that we give the hymns a glace to make sure that we won't be singing something that doesn't conform to Church Teaching..

At The Vatican, Personnel Is Poison

On August 16th it was revealed that Pope Francis has appointed Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia to head both the Pontifical Council for Life and the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family.  He already heads the Pontifical Council for the Family.  Please note that it was the latter council that published a "sex education" program during World Youth Day that can accurately be described as pornographic and disrespectful of the authority of parents.  It was also Paglia who stated that during last year's World Family Meeting in Philadelphia last year, gays would enjoy the same status as other attendants, in implementation of the proceeds from the sin-nods at that time.  See here and here for more details.  Given the job he's done so far, what could possibly go right with this new dual appointment?

The 1P5 piece mentions that the former head of the Pontifical Council for the Family, Cardinal Ennio Antonelli, was excluded from the two sin-nods although he is a staunch defender of the Church's teachings in these matters.  Hmm..  Perhaps that preceding sentence might be a tad more accurate if we scratch the "although" and instead substitute "because".  I was aware that no one representing the JPII Institute was present for either sin-nod, perhaps for the same reason.  There is also some expectation that Professor Josef Seifert will be ejected from the Council for Life, both for his defense of the Faith and for being a vocal critic of Amoris Laetitia.

A Catholic News Service piece that appears in Catholic Register stated that the Pope made these changes to "focus more clearly on the horizon of mercy" for "even in theological study, a pastoral perspective and attention to the wounds of humanity should never be lacking".  Here we see the false dichotomy between truth and mercy being ever so slyly interjected here.  Without the sharpest focus on God's truth, there is no real mercy.  What we will see is an allowance of the "anything goes" attitude that Paglia already displayed at the Philadelphia meeting.  No one can seriously doubt that the pope is systematically establishing godless progressivism inside the Vatican.

Now for the second Kasperite dissident bishop..

Bishop Kevin Farrell of the Archdiocese of Dallas will be taking the reins of the Dicastery for the Laity, Family and Life.  He too has proven himself an enemy of Church moral teaching.  Recently he appointed as pastor of one of his churches a priest who was associated with "St. Sebastian's Angels", a network of flaming-gay priests.  Vox Cantoris exposed that, plus Farrell's hissy-fit against Catholic bloggers (he'd do Rosica proud!).  A Blog For Dallas Area Catholics revealed that Farrell is giving support to a dissident "gay ministry" in area parishes.  The fact that this group calls itself "Always Our Children" is its own red flag.  This bunch has links to both New Ways Ministry and Dignity groups.  Again, one wonders what could possibly go right with such an assignment.  But having things "go right" is obviously not the intent.

Cardinal Burke has called for a 54-day Rosary novena for the intention of bringing our nation back to sanity.  It couldn't hurt to include Holy Mother Church in that prayer intention as well.  We clearly need it.

What Do Alan Keyes And Cokie Roberts Have In Common?

They both evince an irrational animosity towards Donald Trump while completely ignoring the evil that a Hillary presidency would bring.  Yesterday Alan Keyes had an article published in Renew America that is quite frankly filled with sanctimonious non sequiturs as he tries to justify people not casting a vote for Trump in this election.

His article seems to be an attempt to rebut an article written by a Christian pastor that urges a vote for Trump.  Take a look at the first paragraph as he quotes a statement from Mr. Gallup's that questions how a Christian can in good conscience allow Hillary to take the White House.  Keyes then tries to put words in Gallup's mouth by suggesting that Gallup was advocating fear.  No, Gallup was not advocating fear; he was questioning the workings of the consciences who would allow a Trump vote.

I don't have time to go through the whole mess, but I will focus on this question that he asks in the middle of the article: "So God will hold us responsible for Clinton's evil because we refused to embrace Trump's?"  There are some key problems with this question.

• There is a tacit assumption that the evil of a Clinton presidency would be no worse than that of Trump.  Anyone who believes that hasn't been paying attention to events of the past several years, or even of the past several weeks as Clinton's body count seems to be increasing.  It's either that or they are engaging in intellectual dishonesty to justify their own irrational animosity towards Trump.
• In terms of Catholic moral theology, the question might be more accurately rendered, "Will God hold us responsible for Clinton's evil because we refused to do what we could to prevent it?"  The answer is a resounding "YES".
• The question is followed by Jesus' admonition to "be perfect".  That is one of many non sequiturs.  "Being perfect" means, among other things, dealing realistically with situations that don't always offer clear black-vs-white options.  It doesn't mean refusing to deal with these situations while attempting to absolve oneself of responsibility for the consequences of such abdication of Christian duty.

The Roman Catholic Church, in her wisdom, has always recognized that there are situations in which we must ponder carefully our choices.  That is why she has given us guidelines to assist us in so doing, as I have attempted to do in recent posts.  Keyes is Catholic, yet nowhere in his article do I see any reference to the principles on which I touched, or any other reference to Catholic moral theology for that matter.

Then there is another Catholic, news commentator Cokie Roberts.   During an episode of "Morning Joe" this past Tuesday, she opined that those supporting Trump are "morally tainted".   She said nary a peep about Hillary, save to warn that she might commit an error  (like Bengazi, or the email deletions, support for baby-murder and sexual immorality, etc) and Trump achieve victory as a result.  Some of my friends believe that Cokie Roberts is pro-life.  I had my doubts then and now I'm left with no doubt that the unborn don't rate a blip on her radar screen.

Roberts' screed was none too surprising, but Keyes' was.  I don't know how he jumped the tracks but I sure hope he corrects that.

Why It Is Most Likely Immoral To Deny Your Vote To Trump

We've all seen and participated in some discussions in which Christians have said they won't vote for Trump because he's merely the "lesser of two evils".  When the political landscape has been rehearsed before them, they invariably say that they must be guided by their "consciences".  While there's some truth to that, they omit a large part of that picture.  We Christians, if we are to utilize our consciences properly, must ensure that we are forming and informing our consciences in accordance with Church teaching, particularly in accordance with the principles of Catholic moral theology.

In my most recent post on this matter I linked to a video by Michael Matt regarding this very topic and also linked to other attempts (here and here) to examine this matter through the prism of Catholic moral theology.  I call to attention a comment on that post to which I replied on August 5th.  In that comment I noted that Hillary's body count is growing; indeed, since that time there have been 4-5 additional "mysterious" deaths.  The quotation from Mr. Gruden that I cited is now even more relevant: "Can I in good conscience act in a way that helps a liberal like Hillary Clinton win the presidency?"

In that first link, I quoted from Father Peter West who cites three aspects of a human act.  All three aspects must be good or at least morally neutral in order for the act to be good.  If one of those aspects is evil, then the act is evil.  Those aspects are: 1) the inherent nature of the act 2) intention of the one placing the act, 3) circumstances surrounding the act.  He does a decent job explaining these.  The only thing I might elaborate on is the intention.  One can have a number of valid intentions to placing a vote.  Namely, one can vote for Candidate A because they believe that Candidate B would be worse than A, understanding that either Candidate A or Candidate B and no others will have a chance at victory.

I've also dealt with the Principle of Double Effect, a principle recognized by the Church since some acts can have both positive and negative effects..  There are four criteria that must be met under this principle for an act to be morally good.

1. The act itself must be good or at least morally neutral
2. The evil effect and the good effect must proceed equally from the act.  The good effect cannot be a result of the evil effect
3. The intention must be good; we may not directly will the evil effect.
4. There must be a proportional reason for tolerating the evil effect.  

In previous posts I've brought all these factors to bear on the question of casting a vote for Donald Trump.  So have others.  Even some #nevertrump folks believe that a vote for Trump is at least morally permissible.

However, just as the decision to vote for Trump must be subjected to rigorous scrutiny under the lens of Catholic moral theology, so too must the decision not to vote for Trump be subjected to the same rigorous examination.  It fails.  Right off the bat, looking at the fourth factor of the Double Effect principle, we see no proportional reason for tolerating the election of Hillary Clinton.  Bear in mind that she has promised to expand abortion, promote the gay agenda, fund Planned Parenthood, stack the Supreme Court with pro-aborts, and we see her body count ever-growing.  What "proportional reason" can be offered for tolerating that?

When I've posed that question to some (mostly on facebook discussions) the great majority of them will reply, "but at least I vote my conscience" as though that's a supreme good in and of itself.  I link now to an article found on American Thinker.  Mr. Lopez states, "Of course who wins the election is more important than your precious conscience or how you feel about voting.  Your country matters more than you do.  Has America become so weak and self-absorbed that people no longer understand what it means to say, 'It's not all about you, honey'?"  He has a very valid point.

The role of our conscience is to assist us in selecting acts that are in obedience to God.  That is why we need to form and inform them in accordance with Christ's teachings as revealed through Holy Mother Church (that includes Catholic moral theology).  It is a means to an end, the end being to please God.  We do not seek to assuage or please our own consciences for their own sakes.  If consciences are not informed by and subordinate to objective Catholic morality, they are not much more than pride and sentimentality disguised in sanctimonious veneer. When I hear some of the #nevertrump crowd say "no one can deter me from my conscience" and "I won't sell my soul" I have to suspect that they may well be turning their consciences into de facto idols.

I think for some of the #nevertrump crowd, their animosity towards Trump is a very strange sort of pride.  Allen West (himself a one-time candidate for president) has some words to consider.  He's correct about the tantrums being pitched by these "nevertrump" folks.  Don't we find it odd that they spend more time and energy kvetching about Trump than they do about Hillary?  In their disregard for any consequence of their trash-talking against Trump, they seem quite willing to cut off their noses to spite their faces.

I've asked this before and will repeat myself.  If there are objective reasons (as opposed to subjective resonations with consciences) why one thinks they can just let Hillary waltz into the White House by not supporting Trump, please advise.

Why It Is Most Likely Immoral To Deny Your Vote To Trump (duplicate)

Somehow this post shows up twice.  I would have deleted this one but then I would have lost TLM's comments.  Please note that TLM's comments pertain to the post above this.  Apologies for the confusion.

St John Neumann Parishioners! Boycott CCHD Collection This Weekend

As I said in my post last week, most parishes in the Archdiocese of Washington had their CCHD collection last weekend.  However, because it was the first Sunday of the weekend, last week we had the monthly collection for parish maintenance, postponing the CCHD collection to this weekend.

Just a reminder - the collection has been disguised as something called "Communications and Human Development".  The Archdiocese did that in addition to moving the collection from November to August.  Please don't drop one penny in that collection.  Instead, drop in that basket the note that is included in this post.  Say #no2cchd.  Please spread word of this in your email circles and on your social pages.  Thanks.

Catholic Charities CEO (And Other Social Justice Leaders) - Donating To Pro-Abortion Candidates

Let's look at Catholic Charities as a whole.  We see the majority of contributions going towards pro-abort candidates (there are a few pockets of sanity in that list).  Most notably, we see that Msgr John Enzler, president and CEO of Catholic Charities, gave $250 to pro-abortion John Delaney last November and Kathleen Matthews a few months prior.  In addition to being pro-abortion herself, Matthews is the wife of Chris Matthews.

There's more to this Enzler-Matthews situation than meets they eye.  Let me recall some history.  Msgr John Enzler was pastor of Blessed Sacrament in DC.  It sits on the south side of Western Avenue.  On the north side is Chevy Chase MD.  I think it was in the very early part of 2012 that he left Blessed Sacrament to take the reins of Catholic Charities.  In February, despite our many pleas, Chris Matthews did a book-signing at Blessed Sacrament.  The timing of the event was such that caused us to believe that the invitation to Matthews occurred while Enzler was still at Blessed Sacrament.  At any rate, we were there when Matthews appeared and we protested quite unmistakably.  See here for some reports on that.  So now we can see what appears to be a rather cozy relationship between the CEO of Catholic Charities and a prominent pro-abortion "katholyc" couple.

Looking at Just Faith, we see that the little that was contributed went to Barack Obama and John Kerry.  Put the word "Jesuit" in the employer box and you'll see that most of their recipients are pro-aborts, with a few pockets of sanity sprinkled throughout.

There are a number of people named "Charles Short" on this page, but the one of interest is in Rockville, MD.  Currently Special Assistant to the County Executive, he was a director of social concerns for the Archdiocese of Washington.  He recently gave money to pro-abortion Chris Van Hollen as the latter runs for the Senate seat being vacated by Barbara Mikulski.

Let's look at contributions from those who draw paychecks from Catholic University of America.  Stephen Schneck is the Director of the Institute for Policy And Catholic Studies at CUA - at least he was at one time.  In addition to his many other lapses of judgment, he has seen fit to donate solely to pro-abortion politicians.  Why on earth was he ever put in a position where he could corrupt young Catholic minds?

Until very recently, Barbara Early was an associate professor of social work at Catholic University of America.  As you can see at this link, she contributed a total of $1500 to Obama/Biden and four months ago to Clinton/Kaine.  Leah Wortham, a law professor, has contributed thousands to Obama/Biden throughout the years. Eric Jenkins, another professor, gave $2000 to John Kerry.

These people are so-called "movers and shakers" in the "social justice" crowd within the US hierarchy.  As we see where they literally put their money, we get a clear indication regarding their not-so-hidden socialistic and anti-God mindsets.  Their "social justice" is not Catholic by any stretch of the imagination.

Donors To Pro-Abort Pols Working In The Church

Michael Hichborn, director of Lepanto Institute, used the internet to ferret out the fact that 98% of Catholic Relief Services employee donations went to candidates who promote abortion and other anti-life goals.  He used the site www.opensecrets.org.

Taking inspiration from this suggestion, I decided to do a little digging myself.  Instead of "Catholic" inside the employer box I put therein "Archdiocese of Washington".  Lo and behold, we have a Catholic priest who has been regularly contributing to the Democratic National Committee.  Remember: this is the party that has "abortion rights" and "gay rights" ensconced in its platform.  This is the party that featured pervert Lena Dunham as a speaker at its most recent convention.  The contributer of interest is Father Eamon Dignan, priest in residence at St John's in Hollywood MD.  Phyllis Siegrist, a school teacher within the archdiocese, has also donated to the Party of Death.  I do not know if she is currently employed.  On the plus side, most of the archdiocesan donors have contributed to pro-life people.

Let's look at the Archdiocese of Baltimore.  Kristin Witte ponied over $500 to the Maryland Democratic Party.  Looking her up on the archdiocese's site, we learn that she is (or was) the Coordinator of Pastoral Care and Justice within the Youth Ministry office.  Take a look at this Directory of the Division of Youth and Young Adult Ministry.  Go to page 8, the "justice and service" section.  As I read through the "education" programs, I can detect the stench of Just Faith.

Another is Henry Fortier, who contributed $250 to Obama's presidential campaign in 2008.  He helped craft the Code of Conduct for Church Personnel for the Archdiocese of Baltimore.  Doesn't it seem that Mr. Fortier himself needs lessons on Catholic conduct?  One basic lesson is that you don't give cash to avowed abortion-supporters.  He was one of the consultants tapped for "knowledge" by the Blue Ribbon Committee on Catholic Schools to come up with a "strategic plan".  (By the way - one of the members of this "Blue Ribbon Committee" was Father Joseph Muth of St. Matthews's: yes, that one!)

Monica Courtney is/was a substitute teacher at St. Louis Catholic School.  She gave $500 to Hillary Clinton in 2008.  ElectionFund.org reports that as of Sept 2012, she had contributed a total of $20,000 to "Kathy Hochul for Congress".  That's quite a chunk of change for a substitute teacher; I presume she had another job as well.  Currently she's Lieutenant Governor of New York, picked by Andrew Cuomo himself.  According to this bio of her, she has a "history of taking on right-wing extremists".  Apparently Courtney wasn't the only one who supported her in Congress; Emily's List supported her too as she championed baby-murder, the Obamacare contraception mandate and gay #mowwidge.  All this doesn't speak well for Courtney's adherence to Catholic moral teachings regarding the sins of contraception, abortion and homosexual conduct.  Should she be teaching Catholic children?

The political candidates whom one supports is an unmistakable indicator of the convictions and mindsets of the donors.  I will most likely continue this line of research for future posts, but my readers now know the sites if they wish to conduct their own research (and I hope they do).  I'll close this now with one more revelation.  Carlos Ortiz Miranda is Associate General Counsel for the USCCB's Office of General Counsel.  He specializes in "immigration"; that is, he implements the USCCB's pandering to the progressives' wishes to foment unbridled illegal entry into this country.  Is that why he donated $500 to Hillary Clinton last November?

Pope Francis Wanted A Poor Church - Regrettably He's Attaining That

Last Wednesday I wrote a piece on the satanic pig slop that oozed from the Vatican entitled "The Meeting Point".  It is immoral and a slap in the face to parents everywhere.

A few days ago, two of my colleagues at the Catholic Media Coalition, Alice Grayson and Stephanie Block, wrote their own critique of this program.  It appears on the Spero Forum site and is entitled "The Poverty That Is The Vatican's New Sexual Education Program".   I encourage its study.  It points out (among other things) that with this program the Vatican just spit in the eye several of the previous pontiffs who upheld the role of the parents and decried sex ed in classroom settings.

The article calls this "Meeting Point" thing a poverty.  The authors are spot-on correct, and I believe they've discovered a word that is very descriptive of both this pontificate and the "social justice" crowd in general.

Just recall some of Pope Francis' comments during his pontificate so far.

• He said that the biggest problem young people face today is unemployment - not lack of teaching about Jesus and the Church, not unbridled and perverted sexuality, not a solid family life - but poverty.
• He has characterized many terrorist acts as stemming from economic pressures, refusing to acknowledge that Islam is a murderous and barbaric ideology.
• In the most recent "pope video", he didn't once mention the Name of Jesus, but engaged in glorification, if not idolization of sports.
• I'm sure there are others, but these are what come immediately to mind.

Today's Gospel reading was from Luke 12:32-48.  One line in that is "where your treasure is, there also will your heart be".  Take a look at the bullet points above in light of that passage.  Does  anyone think that our Church hierarchy is focused upon saving souls from hell and helping them toward heaven?

Now consider the "social justice" crowd and their mindsets as displayed by the programs they emphasize.  Two of the biggest such culprits organizations in the US Church are Catholic Relief Services and Catholic Campaign for Human Development.  For more background information on them, you need only put their names in the search box at the top left on this blog to read many accounts (I do suggest that you look at the linked material as well).   The Lepanto Institute has done a lot of research as well; please look at their site.

Both these organizations (CRS and CCHD), under the direct control of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, disregard the central mission of the Church for ancillary matters.  Jesus Christ founded the Church to save souls from hell and to give them the means to obtain eternal salvation.  That's it.  Any other concerns such as meeting physical needs, good though they may be in and of themselves, must be subordinate to that main God-given mission - not vice versa!.  Else they inflict upon the Church a deadly spiritual poverty in their mistaken pursuit of eliminating temporal poverty.  When Judas complained to Jesus about the woman's "waste" when she anointed His feet with oil, Jesus reminded him that "the poor you'll have with you always" as He upheld the woman and her worship of Jesus.  As an aside, the Servant of God Archbishop Fulton Sheen once quipped that Judas was the "patron saint of social justice".

Judas' example is being emulated.  When CRS officials are caught with facebook pages stating "I stand with Planned Parenthood", Judas is being emulated.  When Ralph McCloud, who worked for Wendy "Abortion Barbie" Davis' reelection campaign, is still retained as CCHD's director, Judas is being emulated.  I could go on and on but don't want this post to get too long.  The point is that these outfits, while ostensibly existing to eliminate temporal poverty, are depriving souls of what they need for eternal salvation and are actually impeding their access to these graces.  In other words, they are deliberately foisting upon Catholics spiritual poverty - the kind that can starve souls to damnation.  Pope Francis said in the beginning of his pontificate, "I want a poor church".  Well, he got it alright: with his dopey plane interviews, his decimation of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, with his mockery of Catholics offering him spiritual bouquets, etc, he has helped cripple the Church's mission of saving souls.

At any rate, these beasts (CRS and CCHD) need to be starved of Catholic cash.  Many parishes in the Archdiocese of Washington had their second collections today taken on behalf of what they call "Communications and Human Development".  That's simply a disguise for the CCHD.  At least one parish, St. John Neumann in Gaithersburg, will have theirs' next weekend.  I urge them to boycott this collection.  See yesterday's post for more details.

Most dioceses will have their CCHD collections in November.  I'll be putting out boycott reminders until then.

On-The-Job Deathscort Training - Gotta Block Those Signs!

In my ongoing efforts to supplement the WACDTF deathscort training by displaying to its recruits what is really expected of them in front of the abortuaries, I present this episode of "On-The-Job Deathscort Training".  Thank me very much!  Shall we commence with today's lesson?

Once again, let us review WACDTF's oh-so-lofty-sounding "goals and guidelines".  Don't they sound lovely?  However, what you are about to see is not mentioned once in this list.  You are about to witness your fellow deathscorts engage in sign blockage.  Now what does that have to do with "keeping clinic access open"?  Absolutely nothing!  Moreover, can it not be said that the sign blockage is a distraction from their stated mission?  They know that, as evidenced by how fast they scurry from the signs once they realize that I'm recording them.

At any rate, dear deathscort rookies, their intellectual dishonesty is there for all to see.  Is that what you want to emulate?  Is that what you want to become?  Do yourselves a spiritual and intellectual favor; don't sacrifice your own integrity by facilitating the murders of tiny children.

Now the episode..

This Weekend!! Boycott CCHD Collection

Most dioceses still retain the old second collection schedule whereby the second collection for the Catholic Campaign for Human Development occurs in November.  A few years ago, as calls for boycotts resulted from the CCHD scandals unearthed by faithful Catholics, a few dioceses tried various tricks to sidestep boycott efforts.   One of these is my own diocese, the Archdiocese of Washington (DC).

They not only moved that second collection to August, they decided to combine it with the collection for the Catholic Communications office.  Thus not only did they reschedule it, they renamed it - ostensibly to recognize the other organization.  So now we have the "Catholic Communications and Human Deveopment" collection.

If you go to this page for the Archdiocese of Washington second collection schedule, please click on the link entitled "2016 second collection schedule", you'll notice that for most parishes, the CCHD collection will occur this coming weekend - that is, today and tomorrow.  I said "most parishes" for a reason.  My parish, according to its bulletin from last week (go here and click on the 7/31 bulletin and go to page 6) you'll see the CCHD collection scheduled for the following weekend.

I've written copiously about the many problems of CCHD, including its extremely inauspicious origins.  I needn't rehash all that here but now link to an anthology for your information.  I will highlight one of those posts for in it is a flyer that you can print and put in the CCHD envelope in lieu of money.

Please do not give any money to CCHD.  It's time to starve this beast once and for all.  Say #no2cchd.  Please spread this word on email and your social sites.

Three Insults To The Faith in One Week

This past Monday, Joe Biden, Vice President of the United States and dissident Catholic, "officiated" at the #mowwidge of two White House staff members, both of them males.  I hesitate to call them "men" for real men understand and obey the laws of nature and nature's God.  Canon lawyer Ed Peters has some reflections as to whether or not he incurred excommunication by making a mockery of true marriage.  One key point that he makes is that if the Pope or Cardinal Wuerl were to issue canonical legislation making what Biden did a canonical crime, then yes Biden could be excommunicated.

Earlier, at the DNC convention, the president of NARAL gave an account of her own abortion in order to gin up support for more baby murder.  Sister Simone Campbell, a "nuns on the bus" leader, applauded this talk.  Campbell has made no secret of her support of abortion.

Then we have some outright heresy from Father James Martin, S.J.  Currently he is editor-at-large for America magazine, the dissident rag published by the Jesuits.  During the past few days, Martin let loose with these tweets.

For him to state that Jesus could be "challenged" by the Canaanite woman is to allege that Jesus had intellectual and moral imperfections.  That is a pure slap in the face to the Divine Personhood of Jesus.  Yes, He has two natures but as a Person He is Divine, with all that it entails.  However, while Martin undoubtedly pronounced heresy, he's not the first Jesuit of recent memory to do so.  Last December, the pope opined that Jesus probably had to beg forgiveness from His parents.  Again, to ascribe sinfulness to God Himself is heresy and probably blasphemous as well.

So I've now pointed out three insults to the Faith, all occurring in a week.  The timing isn't all that these three incidents have in common.  Here's another thing that I think they'll have in common.  Those responsible for these heresies will most likely suffer no consequences for their misbehaviors.  Their superiors will look the other way and pretend that these didn't occur.

Ye Shall Do Sports And Sports Will Set You Free

If that title sounds vaguely familiar, it's because it's a paraphrase of "you shall know the truth and the truth will set you free".  But that's so neo-palagian and triumphalist, you see!

In this latest "pope video" we hear the pope praying that a "culture of encounter" be built by - sports!  Yep!  That's the prayer intention.  However the words "God" or "Jesus" aren't mentioned once.  In Ephesians 2:14, Paul says that "He (Jesus) is our peace, who has made us both one, and has broken down the dividing wall of hostility.."  But again that's too.. traditional.  Instead, we are treated to the sight of tennis balls smashing through brick walls.

Why cannot the pure truths of Jesus Christ be proclaimed, as they once were?  Why do we have to behold our Church prostituting itself before all these cheap gimmicks?

On the plus side, one could easily bookmark the youtube link.  Then one can watch it next Lent as a visual mortification.

Voting For Trump Morally Right, Not Voting For Him Morally Wrong

If it seems I'm spending an inordinate amount of time on the upcoming elections, it's because the stakes are so high.  Not only is direction of the United States at stake here, but perhaps the fate of western civilization in general hangs in the balance.  Oddly enough, the vote in November isn't so much threatened by rigging as it is by otherwise intelligent Christians who plan to either cast no vote for president or to "write in" a third candidate.

I've stated before why I believe that Christian morality mandates a vote for Donald Trump.  See here and here.   As you can see, I made attempts to bring the principles of Catholic moral theology to bear on the situation.  In several instances, my attempts to do so were met with contemptuous disregard (particularly on facebook).  In none of these instances did anyone offer any counterargument based on moral theology.  I suspect it was because they couldn't.

A friend of mine called my attention to this article found in TownHall.com, entitled "Why Voting For Trump Is A Morally Good Choice".  I suggest that it be read.  Mr. Gruden points out that we as Christians have a positive moral duty to seek the good of the nation in which we find ourselves, citing Jeremiah 29:7.  This runs counter to the rather insipid notion that we as Christians have no responsibility for the outcome of the vote if we choose not to vote ourselves.  Gruden suggests that we all ask ourselves this question: "Can I in good conscience act in a way that helps a liberal like Hillary Clinton win the presidency?"  Of course the answer is no.

I wished that Mr. Gruden's article would have overtly stated the converse of the statement that is his title.  If voting for Trump is a morally good choice, then the denial of our vote for Trump is morally wrong.  There is no dancing around that fact.

I'll now post below a video on the topic featuring Michael Matt and Christopher Ferrera as they discuss "Trumping Hillary" from their Catholic perspective.

Is Pope Francis Flirting With Women Ordination Heresy?

Last May the pope broached the possibility of setting up a commission to "study" women's ordination.  Now it seems that this possibility is coming to rotten fruition.  LifeSiteNews revealed the names of some members of this "Special Commission for the Study of the Diaconate of Women".  Not surprisingly, we see that some outright dissidents are members of this commission.

Pope John Paul II, in his encyclical Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, stated explicitly that the Church has no authority to ordain women.  Therefore there is nothing that needs to be "studied".  There is only the teaching of Jesus Christ, through Sacred Tradition, to be obeyed.

So what is the harm in this type of "study"?  Well, let's look at the very first time such a "study" of God's clear commandment was undertaken; it's in the Holy Bible.  That first "study" was recorded in the first few chapters of Genesis.  You might recall that Eve, at the prompting of the serpent, "studied" the question of whether or not it would be a good idea to eat of the forbidden tree.  She managed to convince Adam to undertake this "study" too, although God's clear directive rendered unnecessary any such study.  For thousands of years, all mankind has been reeling from the disastrous effects of that study, with many being damned to hell as a consequence.

What's next?  Will they be "studying" whether or not those in mortal sin can receive Holy Communion?  Oh, wait...

I regret that this pope's repeated misdeeds are placing him at odds with the very Tradition that he's supposed to protect.  Let us pray that he wakes up and stops undermining Holy Mother Church.

Pope Minimizes Islamic Violence While Bad-Mouthing Catholicism

As he was on his way to Rome from Poland a few days ago, the pope attempted a white-wash of Islamic violence that was not only insipid on its face, but downright slanderous to the Catholic faith.  He said, "if I speak of Islamic violence I must also speak of Catholic violence".  Really?  When did Catholics, in pursuit of their creed, engage in barbarous acts such as:

• beheadings of babies
• wide-scale rape and murder of women
• shooting up night clubs
• murderous rampages along the lines of San Bernardino, Nice, etc
• bombings such as the Boston Marathon incident
• et cetera, et cetera

Have there ever been criminals who are Catholics?  Yes.  But no one pretends that these criminals committed their crimes in obedience to the Teachings of Jesus Christ.

The Muslims, however, do carry out their crimes in the name of their murderous creed.  The pope's denial of that plain fact is so insipid that the muslims themselves hold him and his prattlings in contempt.  I will say this for these muslims; at least they are honest about what their religion teaches.  They hold the pope in contempt for his obvious attempt to appease him.  Frankly I understand how they do so and indeed the pope's pandering does make him appear to be a simpering fool as his mealy-mouthed whitewash is unworthy of a Vicar of Christ.  When these thugs say that their violence is mandated by their koran, they are correct.

Both Cardinals Burke and Sarah spoke words of wisdom as I pointed out in my blog post regarding the pope's plane trip to Poland.